| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 228.1 | | MUTTON::BROWN | | Tue Mar 24 1992 09:40 | 23 |
| I am not sure if we can help you with this Sandy. If the experts don't
agree on this issue, how can those of us that are not "experts" give
you any more info than they can?
Basically, if your cats are going outside, they should have FeLV
vaccinations since some degree of protection is better than no
protection.
Yes, a cat can be harboring the disease but still test negative for the
virus. The virus can "hide out" in the bone marrow from what I
understand. Stress can bring that virus out of hiding.
I believe I have read that a cat can only infect other cats if the
virus is circulating in the body (not hiding in the bone marrow). If
this is true, then a cat that tests negative is not a threat to other
cats.
I do not vaccinate my cats or kittens for FeLV since they are not going
outside. That is my choice. If my cats were going outside, I would be
the first in line at the vet's to get them the vaccine. Some
protection is better than none, in my opinion.
Jo
|
| 228.2 | | OXNARD::KOLLING | Karen/Sweetie/Holly/Little Bit Ca. | Tue Mar 24 1992 11:24 | 10 |
| On the other hand, I do have my cats vacinated for it, since I lost a
cat who had been indoors only for 8 years to it. He had
close contact via nose touchings at the screen door with a neighbor's
cat who died of it. Note that it will likely put your cats "under the
weather" for 12 to 24 hrs after the shot. If they are lethargic for
longer than that, a stop at the vet's is in order. I also wait in the
vet's office for 20 minutes after the shots to be sure they aren't
going into shock from the shot, although the vet says that is so rare
that this isn't necessary.
|
| 228.3 | | XCUSME::KENDRICK | | Tue Mar 24 1992 11:42 | 13 |
| I'm in the same boat as .1. All my cats were tested for the virus
before being adopted and all tested negative. Since they are indoor
only and we live on the second floor so the chance of nose touching with
other cats through window or door screens is nil, I chose to not have
them vaccinated. This was on the recommendation of my vet who knows
their living arrangements, coupled with the fact the vaccine is not
100% and is very expensive.
If my cats went outside, however, I wouldn't hesitate to vaccinate
them.
Terry + 4
|
| 228.4 | | MAYES::MERRITT | | Tue Mar 24 1992 11:54 | 18 |
| I realize that there are no correct answers...but I find it
frustrating that all the studies that have been done come up
with total different results. If the range of Safeness was closer...
I wouldn't even be questioning the vaccine....but when it ranges
from 40% - 95% I find it hard to believe if the same vaccine was
tested...how could the results be so different and do I want to
trust this vaccine.
I have also heard (from vets) that you might as well give the cat
a shot of water because that is about how good the vaccine is and
then I hear stories (not sure if they are true)...that cats have
tested positive and died from FELV after having the vaccine.
So...before I pay the expense to have about 15 cats vaccinated..
(my sisters and mine)...I am trying to gain more knowledge, determine
the facts from the myths, and get rid of my fears of the vaccine.
Sandy
|
| 228.5 | Worth the price for outdoor cats | MUTTON::BROWN | | Tue Mar 24 1992 13:24 | 26 |
| There are different brands of vaccines. The test results that I posted
in note 29 were from an independent study, and it compared the
different brands of Leukemia vaccines. One thing that has to be
considered when reviewing test data is who is doing the test? The
manufacturer? Or an outside company that has nothing to gain or lose
based on the test results.
The vaccine cannot give a cat the disease. It is a killed virus
vaccine not a modified live one. Cats that end up positive after
vaccination were probably latent carriers or did contract the disease
after vaccination. The vaccine itself is considered very safe now. As
with any vaccine though, there is a certain degree of risk of
anaphylactic shock or other reaction immediately after injection.
Also, some cats may become lethargic and feverish for a few hours after
vaccination. These risks are minimal compared to the risk of
contracting FeLV outdoors.
The expense is great if you are doing that many cats. But, there are
shot clinics that do the FeLV shots at reduced prices. You would have
to have all the cats tested first, which would be the greatest expense.
Some of the shot clinics also offer reduced cost testing too. Check
around.
Jo
|
| 228.6 | Here's MY experience..... | DELNI::JMCDONOUGH | | Wed Mar 25 1992 06:43 | 52 |
| I can tell you some things from experience....
(1)Yes---a cat CAN have the virus and test negative. I had one. She
tested negative from the first time we had her tested, was vaccinated
every year, tested negative every year, and died from the disease in
her fourth year within a week---from FeLV!! Both our Vet and the head
of the hospital at Tufts--who I spoke to at length--suspect that the
virus MAY have been present in her bone marrow, passed to her from her
mother.
(2)Can a cat test POSITIVE yet never get the disease?? Emphatically
YES again. We have had two that were in this category. One lived until
an estimated 18 years---estimated because we sort of pegged her age at
around 10-12 when we picked her up after she was abandoned, and she
lived with us in perfect health for 8 years. She tested Positive every
year for the first 3 years we had her and we stopped having the tests
My present "special" girl, "Cookie", tested Positive when she was a
kitten, and we had her tested once since--agains Positive. Cook's about
4 now, and is healthy as a horse...and that reminds me, we gotta slack
her off on the chow...she's getting a tummy-roll...
(3)How good is the vaccine?? Unknown. The numbers that I've heard are
between 60 and 90 percent effective...but there haven't really been any
comprehensive test programs done on it. What HAS been proven is that if
a cat is vaccinated and the vaccine DOES react within the cat's immune
system as it should, then that cat WILL NOT contract the disease from
contact with an infected cat. However, the only way to PROVE this
effectiveness is to make the contact...and the problem here is pretty
obvious and drastic: If the immunization did NOT act as planned, then
the vaccinated cat will contract the disease.
(4)What about positive tested animals? Some new and fairly
encouraging information has become known in recent years. It's a fact
that a cat that is a positive tester will NOT be harmed in any way if
they are vaccinated. In fact, there have been more than a few cases
that have been documented on Positives that have been immunized and
they've tested NEGATIVE after the immunization!! The thought here is
that the vaccine MAY be triggering the animal's immune system to
REJECT and for antibodies against the virus!!
So...what we now do is FOREGO the test completely...and save the $20
to $30 bucks that the test costs. Instead, we simply have ALL of our
cats immunized each year. So far---with 2 Positives living with 3
Negatives(Last tests were done 3 years ago, and one cat DID die of old
age since then...), we've had no problems. Are we 100% SURE that it
will NEVER happen?? Not on your life!! But we are willing to take the
chance since the cats we have are happy, healthy and
active...(Sometimes to the point where I've threatened to look for a
shoe at 3:00 in the morning--but I settle for the water-squirt
bottle...)
John McD
|
| 228.7 | Tala | GEMINI::NICKERSON | | Wed Mar 25 1992 11:19 | 31 |
| HI Sandy,
The previous note said the same but here goes:
I had a beautiful calico - Tala (the name is the standard unit of
currency in Western Samoa - perfect for a "money" cat). I had both
Tala and my other cat tested - they both were negative. They got the
shots. Three years later Tala died from Feleuk. My vet said that she
may have just contracted the disease at the time of the test and that's
why she tested negative. It was about a month from the date of
diagnoses (sp?) until we had to have her put to sleep. I wanted her to
die at home where she was happy but it reached the point where she was
laying on my kitchen chair and wouldn't move. She became incontinent
so what I did was put a sheet of plastic on the chair and cover that
with a nice soft towel. Every couple of hours I would prepare a
similar chair in this fashion, move her to that and clean the other
chair. She would begin yowling in the middle of the night and I would
have to go out and comfort her. It got to the point where I was a
basket case (I had a newborn son at the time also!) so we took her to
the vet. He was wonderful and she died in my arms. We brought her
home and buried her.
I don't care how effective the Feleuk shots are - if they offer ANY
degree of safety I won't hesitate to get them. Both my present cats
are vaccinated. I know they're costly. Sometimes vets will give "group
rates" for a large number of animals...
Good luck, sorry for the sad tale, I just don't want to see another cat
go through what my Tala did.
Linda
|
| 228.8 | | RIPPLE::KENNEDY_KA | | Wed Mar 25 1992 21:36 | 13 |
| None of my cats have had the shots. Mine are also indoor cats without
exposure to other cats. Finances are so tight I haven't been able to
afford getting them tested so I don't know if they are positive or not.
I do know that everytime I take one to the vet he gives me a hassle
about it. I'm very aware of the consequences.
When I was breeding Cleo, I did have her tested for FeLV, FIP and FIA
(the feline infectious anemia) and all tests came back negative.
Jo, thank you for writing what you did. I've bought the guilt my vet
keeps throwing at me. I can let go of that guilt now. :-)
Karen
|
| 228.9 | ... | GEMINI::NICKERSON | | Thu Mar 26 1992 07:50 | 11 |
| If you have exclusively indoor cats then it should be YOUR decision if
you want the vaccine. My vet has never put any pressure on me either
way. I started getting the Felv shots for my cats because my friends
cat had the disease and she told me how he died. Since my cats WERE
outdoor cats, I decided to get the shots.
Vets (and people doctors too) have no right to "lay a guilt trip" on
someone because they don't go along with the drs. recommendation.
Their job is to INFORM not CONDEMN!
Linda
|
| 228.10 | It's not a matter of "guilt trip"!!! | DELNI::JMCDONOUGH | | Thu Mar 26 1992 08:37 | 33 |
| Re last few..
I guess I have to agree with the vets, and understand things from
THEIR perspective. While it is a horrible experience to have to put one
of your pets to sleep, the Vet has to face that experience on a daily
basis. SUre, some vets are so 'jaded' from doing this hundreds snd
hundreds of times, that ehy seem to have lost some of their
sensitivity. However, I wouldn't personally WANT a Vet who can simply
kill without feelings. Mine sure isn't that way! Every time I've taken
one of my pets in to have it euthanized, the entire office--Vet,
technicians, receptionist----are ALL in tears.
While I AGREE that it is the personal choice of the owner, I also
think the owner MUST understand the consequences of their actions. I am
at a loss to understand what difference it makes if all the cats are
indoor only?? Mine are all indoor only. My cat that tested Negative and
DIED from the disease was indoor only....but thank GOD I had all of my
others vaccinated at the time,and from the 100% survival of these
others, thevaccine must have worked on them. If a cat in a pack of 8 or
10 NON-Vaccinated animals contracts the disease, then there is about a
99% probability that all of the others in that pack will also contract
it. Of course, there ARE those cats who have a NATURAL immunization to
the disease, and those would survive...but I sure wouldn't want to bet
on which ones they are.
I think the point here and from talking to the various vets is that
NOBODY KNOWS how this disease is spread. It IS spread by contact with
mucous and fecal matter, but there is NO guarantee that this is the
ONLY way it's spread. Nobody has stated in ANY way that it cannot be
spread via 'aerosol'...I.E. via air.... I sure wouldn't want to chance
not having mine vaccinated....
John McD
|
| 228.11 | | MUTTON::BROWN | | Thu Mar 26 1992 09:18 | 19 |
| Actually John, there are quite a few writings about FeLV that do state
that it is not spread by aerosol transmissions. It is also known that
the disease is not stable in a dry environment, or outside the host.
It is also known that the virus can be killed by a solution of bleach
water (1:32) or by Nolvasan or Roccal D disinfectant.
The disease is transmitted through blood, urine, feces and saliva. If
your cat is not sharing these things with other cats, and your cats
have tested negative for FeLV, then you can be reasonably sure that
they will not get it.
If it comes down to a matter of who's the most at risk to contract the
disease and who needs to be vaccinated, I would say that any cat going
outdoors should be vaccinated. As to whether or not indoor only cats
need to be vaccinated, I would think that would be at the owner's
discretion. Nobody deserves to have a guilt trip laid on them about
this, whether that trip comes from the vets or from this notesfile.
Jo
|
| 228.12 | | OXNARD::KOLLING | Karen/Sweetie/Holly/Little Bit Ca. | Thu Mar 26 1992 10:36 | 5 |
| John's note reminds me of a friend of mine who lost a cat to
FeLV a few years ago, and then, like dominos all the rest of her five
cats to it over the next some months or so. This was before a
vaccine existed.
|
| 228.13 | Please explain my 2 dead "indoor only's"?? | DELNI::JMCDONOUGH | | Thu Mar 26 1992 10:38 | 28 |
| Re .11
I can only relate what has been told to me by vets and the folks at
tufts...and while the THINK that it is not transmitted by aerosol, the
Tufts people were very careful NOT to state that this is certain. Lab
tests haven't shown that it CAN be transmitted that way, but labs is
labs.
I have NEVER allowed my cats to roam around outside, and they are
watched very carefully to make sure they do not escape. Threrfore I
would consider them to be "indoor only". I used to test them---and have
LOST TWO OF these "indoor only" "Negative-tested" cats to FeLV!!! This
is a FACT!! Both of these cats DID contract the disease, and they died
from it. Neither had ANY contact with other cats at any time, in any
way.
I think it is pretty narrow-minded to accuse someone of laying a guilt
trip on anyone for relating experiences and stating facts. I personally
believe that most "guilt trips" are self-imposed anyway. If people want
to ignore experiences of others and/or expert advise of a trained
Veterinarian, and then impose a guilt trip on themselves, then that
would seem to be THEIR problem. Would it be better to tell them some
sort of happy tale that is NOT the facts and when their cat(s) contract
a dreaded thng such as this disease accept the guilt of NOT having told
the truth??? Sorry!! It is THEIR prerogative to do as they wish, but
let's not down-play the possible consequences...
John Mc
|
| 228.14 | | MUTTON::BROWN | | Thu Mar 26 1992 10:50 | 12 |
| In the case of the indoor only cats that died of FeLV, the vaccine
wouldn't have saved them. Most likely scenario is that they were
latently infected, and therefore tested negative. The vaccine wouldn't
have prevented them from reverting to postive. But, you are right, it
may have protected your other cats from infection.
The point is, each person decides what is best for his or her cat(s)
based on their own situation and the information available. This
notesfile is not a substitute for the literature available on the
subject, or the advise of a good veterinarian.
Jo
|
| 228.15 | keep them together? | SMURF::STRANGE | Steve Strange - UEG | Wed May 27 1992 22:28 | 28 |
| Hi there! I am seeking advice regarding feline leukemia. Recently, I
adopted two kittens from the pound, from different litters. One is
positive FeLuk. The other has tested negative, and they were separated
while the negative one received her vaccine FeLuk vaccine series.
After much debate, we have decided to let them be together--we figure
they will be much happier together than apart, and will keep each other
thoroughly exercised. (When they were apart, they would cry for each
other, and try to get to each other all the time--it was rather sad).
I have read many stories about positive/negative households being
perfectly fine for years and years, but I have some questions. First
of all, generally speaking, does any one with a FeLuk cat, or one who
reverted to negative, have any suggestions about health maintenance and
improvement, i.e., diet, etc.? My (ex) vet gave me little hope of
reverting the positive sweetie to negative, and would offer no advice
about bolstering her immune system. I know we can help the cat. My
second question relates to the two of them. Does anybody have any
suggestions for making the situation optimal? Should they try to use
separate litter boxes and feeding dishes? Should they be separated
part of the time? Should I feel guilty for letting them be together?
Also, I need to find a decent vet, one who is compassionate. Does any
one know of a really good vet (price does not matter) in the greater
Boston area? If anyone is reading, I would really appreciate hearing
from you, because I have been at my wit's end with worry.
Thanks a bunch!
Steve
|
| 228.16 | | MAGEE::MERRITT | | Thu May 28 1992 06:09 | 17 |
| Steve,
Our shelter houses about 15 Feluk cats...and many of them have
been there for years and are very healthy. A few key points we
follow at the shelter is to feed them the good healthy
foods (Science Diet or Iams) and as soon as one sneezes they are
brought to the vets and put on medicine right away. Also...please
keep them as inside cats...so the Feluk is not passed further.
Your decision to separate them or keep them together is a tough one,
but there are noters in this file that have positive/negative cats
living together for years!! Tough Decision.....
Best wishes for the little guys!!!
Sandy
|
| 228.17 | | OXNARD::KOLLING | Karen/Sweetie/Holly/Little Bit Ca. | Thu May 28 1992 11:03 | 5 |
| I'm glad you're keeping both. My uneducated guess is that the
negative one has already been exposed anyway. Lots of love,
good food, and good vet care is my recipe. Please keep us up to date
on their health, antics, etc.
|
| 228.18 | | OXNARD::KOLLING | Karen/Sweetie/Holly/Little Bit Ca. | Thu May 28 1992 11:04 | 4 |
| I have the dim recollection that there is some thought that the
innoculations might help revert a cat to negative; but I'd check with
a good vet.
|
| 228.19 | my experience | PARITY::DENISE | And may the traffic be with you | Thu May 28 1992 14:19 | 13 |
| When the disease hit my house years ago and took 3 of my then 6 cats,
it was obviously in the house for God knows how long before I realized
it. Three of the 6 never got it and are still very much healthy today.
They have been immunized and never showed positive. They had lived
for over a year with the other 3 cats that did have it. And that was
only once it was discovered, and they ate together,used same box, etc.
I remember reading something about not all cats getting it even if
exposed, some showing positive and then going negative, all kinds of
things.......I think it might be in the old FELINE.
It's good that you immunized the other kitty. You may be lucky and
the disease may never manifest itself, or at least not for a long time.
good luck, Denise
|
| 228.20 | I would do what you're doing... | RLAV::BARRETT | Is it safe? | Fri May 29 1992 14:15 | 22 |
| I also remember reading either in this conference or the old FELINE
about someone who had had a + vaccinated, and they tested neg. later.
I would do exactly as you are doing, Steve. I fought with this when I
was going to adopt a stray from our shelter. She turned out to be +,
and i decided not to expose my 2 to it. The stray was destroyed later
that week, and I still feel guilty. She was one of the sweetest cats
you'd ever want to meet.
Also, as you or someone else pointed out, the neg. one of yours has
probably already been exposed anyways.
And I think I remember seeing something in the old file about a vet at
Tufts doing research on this? At any rate, if I were you, I would try
calling Tufts for help/advice. Also, somewhere in this file is a "help
line" number for Cornell. You could try that also (it costs for the
phone call).
Best of luck to you. I think what you are doing for these two is
great! Please let us know how it goes.
Sue B. + 3
|
| 228.21 | | MUTTON::BROWN | set home/cat_max=5 girls 2 boys 2 hhps | Mon Jun 15 1992 20:12 | 3 |
| You can also check out the FeLV info in topic 29, the medical topic.
Jo
|
| 228.22 | Chance of leukiemia, after innoculations? | AIMHI::BOYKO | | Wed Mar 16 1994 08:18 | 21 |
| Is it possible for my cat to have leukiemia, if she had been
innoculated for this since she was a kitten, and does not go outside
at all ? My cat Tasha, is a Lynx point siamese, that has been vomiting
lately with a fever of 103. She has been to 2 vets, and blood work was
done yesterday, for a leukiemia test, that the doctor said the blood
cells look suspicious. She had been on laxatone, and an antibiotic
for a week. Eating and drinking ok now. The doctor also gave her an
injection to force eating to see if she would keep it down. She did.
Xrays of her lungs were ok - no signs of phnemonia. Barium xrays of
small intestine and large intestine done as well. Just found the food
took a lot longer to pass from sm. intestine to large as it should.
Waiting now to hear more about the blood test, and the vet sent it out
for further examination.
(All my cats have had a the injections that are possible for them since
they were kittens.)
Thanks,
Nancy
|
| 228.23 | | MAGEE::MERRITT | Kitty City | Wed Mar 16 1994 09:06 | 15 |
| Nancy...here's hugs to you and your kitty for a speedy recovery!!
From a survey I did about two years ago regarding the Felv Vaccine,
I found that depending on which vet I spoke to each one had their
own opinion on how effective the vaccine really was. The answers I
received at that time was 40%, 70%, 80% and 95%!!! (that was two years
ago...so my guess it's effectiveness must be better now).
In conclusion...I do believe the vaccine is effective..but I also
feel it is not 100% effective. This is my opinion..and I'm sure some
opinions will differ. Let's hope your kitty has something
else....please keep us posted.
Sandy
|
| 228.24 | | MR4DEC::PGLADDING | Noters do it with a 8-) | Wed Mar 16 1994 09:11 | 19 |
| Sorry to hear about your poor kitty being sick. The leukemia shot
is not 100% effective against the disease, and there is a wide range
of opinions from 40-80% among vets.
I find it hard to believe your kitty has contracted the disease
since she's been indoor only since a kitten and the chance of her
being exposed to a Leuk-positive cat was minimal. Even if two cats
have been exposed, it would take a lot more intimate contact to
catch the disease.
Do you have other cats in your household? Have they been tested
for Leukemia? Some cats are carriers and never show symptoms, but
can pass on the disease.
I hope your doctor's preliminary findings are wrong and that Tasha
gets well soon! If in doubt, it's always best to get a second opinion.
Good luck,
Pam
|
| 228.25 | 2 other cats | AIMHI::BOYKO | | Wed Mar 16 1994 09:23 | 11 |
| Thanks, Pam. Yes I do have another cat Chelsea that is 9 years old
and has been tested right along for leukemia-neg., and kept up for
yearly shots. I am concerned for a new kitten that is a blue point
male Himalayan that I recently bought from a breeder. The parents
were neg., but because of him being only 4 months old, the test would
not be valid right now. But "Niles" has had 1 shot and the next
leukemia shot next week, series of three to start, then yearly shots.
Hope Tasha gets better, as none of my cats go outside, I really don't
see how this could have happened.
Thanks,
|